We need events that give spies - especially to Burgundy

[HanSime]

There's quite a difference between 1 spy a year and one every 5-10 years though (depending on ruler) - the above would mean 1 for every 5-10 spies someone with the NI would get. So I'd say the NI would have very little competition from such a change.

 

[btonton]

One every 5 years is too much that's the number of colonist you get from 2 coastal CoT...
anyway I believe the idea should also add a bit of spy efficiency, there's almost nothing which add spy efficiency I believe (not that I actually take the spy based idea but still)

 

[mallard454]

The yearly spies does not represent the actual number of spies working for you, but rather your ability to launch offensive spy operations. If you had absolutely no spies operating, you would have 0 defense against other countries trying to do stuff to yours.

I don't think that spies and missionaries make a good comparison - yearly missionary gain is way worse. There are 2 different sliders and the national idea available for every country that gives +4 spies, whereas the NI for and slider for missionaries only gives +1.5 and has actual penalties.

 

[unmerged(182703)]

He, this thread made me laugh.

Anyhow, since there is an NI which gives you spies, I don't think it is necessary to add other ways to gain spies. That would weaken that idea.

It's true... if you don't want to spend an NI spot for spies then you probably don't want them enough. I almost always get that NI for a free trade aristrocracy nation since I absolutely must have infiltrate administration. I get kicks out of hunting down a colonial empire's docked fleets so that they have 0% tariff efficiency.

 

[Shackel]

What's with these "anti-change" elitists all of the sudden?

Here's the game without spies.

-You have to be a very patient pacifist to get a PU.
- No destabilizing enemies.
- No summoning rebels to distract your enemies
- No influencing rebels so that they may pop up at a bad time.
- No revenge rebels
- No finding out where your enemy's troops are.
- No destroying colonies without war
- No hastening seiges for when you need to get things done FAST(like against France or a colonizing Britain)
- No ruining other's trade.

You CANNOT harm your enemies without declaring war, which, without spies, could end up TERRIBLY. It is flat out unrealistic to not have at least .1 spy per year.

Saying you don't need spies is like you don't need merchants because you don't want to waste an NI slot on ONE spy a year or because you want more trading. Trading powers would probably have spies across the CONTINENT ruining trade for other countries, while every other power who picked an NI almost required for their type of country/gameplay would need spies for THEIR actions.

A colonizer would need to be able to ruin other's colonies.
A small trading country next to a blob needs to destabilize it.
Any country with a powerful rival would need to wreak havoc there.
Military powers would need to be able to see their opponent's troops.

Everything is MUCH harder without spies, just like everything would be much harder without merchants.

 

[6354201]

There are quite a few countries that don't have any spies being "recruited" in a year. Burgundy for example is at zero. I actually like Burgundy's starting sliders, so I never end up going Plutocracy or Mercantilism.
This means that I'm stuck without any spies the whole game.

Considering that there are events that gives the player merchants, colonists, diplomats, missionaries and magistrates, where the heck are those events that give spies?

I find it so strange that no one even asked for them before, in all these years of EU3.

I think a random event based on some criteria (perhaps having a spy master as an advisor) to give a spy every now and then seems like a good idea.

 

[anomanderus]

What's with these "anti-change" elitists all of the sudden?

Here's the game without spies.

-You have to be a very patient pacifist to get a PU.
- No destabilizing enemies.
- No summoning rebels to distract your enemies
- No influencing rebels so that they may pop up at a bad time.
- No revenge rebels
- No finding out where your enemy's troops are.
- No destroying colonies without war
- No hastening seiges for when you need to get things done FAST(like against France or a colonizing Britain)
- No ruining other's trade.

You CANNOT harm your enemies without declaring war, which, without spies, could end up TERRIBLY. It is flat out unrealistic to not have at least .1 spy per year.

Saying you don't need spies is like you don't need merchants because you don't want to waste an NI slot on ONE spy a year or because you want more trading. Trading powers would probably have spies across the CONTINENT ruining trade for other countries, while every other power who picked an NI almost required for their type of country/gameplay would need spies for THEIR actions.

A colonizer would need to be able to ruin other's colonies.
A small trading country next to a blob needs to destabilize it.
Any country with a powerful rival would need to wreak havoc there.
Military powers would need to be able to see their opponent's troops.

Everything is MUCH harder without spies, just like everything would be much harder without merchants.

Then can't you go into options and make it so you get +1 spy a year regardless? I think you can, if tradeoffs and non-casual game mechanics annoy you so much.

 

[HanSime]

+1 is far too many, that's the same as the NI. There's a difference between frequent spies and infrequent spies, but there's an even greater difference with getting no spies at all, ever, period. No offensive spies at all, not even in a 100 years, is realistic? One spy mission every 5 to ten years in contrast to more than one every year for mercantile nations with the NI isn't a reasonable offset just because it's not in game now?

Seriously though, who here thinks 0.1 a year is almost the same thing as the NI? 10 spies equals 1 spy now? 0 vs 10 is fair, but 1 or 2 vs 10 is completely inbalanced?

'Cause then I'd really love to see your math grades from grammar/high school... (and that's a sad thing).

 

[Trin Tragula]

You know I've never thought about this as I hardly ever use them o

Gut feeling is that strategic choice is good and that spies are an abstract mechanic to help you initiate covert actions abroad rather than having an intelligence department at all. Still I can't see the harm in adding a spy every ten years or so to a country...

 

[btonton]

I don't see how a spy every 10 or even 20 years would ruin the NI...while just being fully plutocratic give you twice as much as the NI. So as long as you start in the middle and your king is not ill too often giving +1 aristo, with 2 slider move you already have almost as much as the NI would give (and by the time you have enough money to use many spies you also have already made the important slider moves) So anyway the Idea by itself is basically not even as good as a good slider start.
A lower chance of successful spy action and adding spy efficiency with the idea would make it a must have for someone who use a spy based strategy, as it is it's just the last solution for those with bad slider settings.